Banksters? Huh? They're being plundered by their pandering welfare states that for decades have attempted to protect everyone from everything. Borrowing money as a solution is simply running its course, that's all. People like you are just peeved because lenders, like bartenders with a drunk on their hands, won't simply lend forever.

Oh goody, another right-wing drone with zero (0) karma, telling me what I feel. Do they teach you guys to project all your own thoughts on everyone you see? Why not try understand the opinions of others instead of your pathetic projections of fear and hate. Borrowing more money from for-profit corporate banks is not at all useful,. I do not know why you would think that is what anyone wants. The national debts are stolen money the banksters take it, and then force the people to pay it back over and over.

bankster (noun) - any of the forces of "Wall Street", or to those persons in the financial services industry who grow rich despite the continued impoverishment of those who depend on their services, and despite their apparent inability to succeed in business without constant government assistance.

"The banksters crashed the economy, but thanks to generous federal bailouts, they won't have to sacrifice their fat bonuses."

so you have no defense of the bankers and wall street gangsters? You think just repeating 'occutard', 'occutard', 'occutard', over and over has some effect?? You go girl!

You see, we use terms that have actual meaning in the real world. This is factual, when you are a banker that operates as a criminal gangster, you earn a title that describes your actions. Notice; it is actions that are replied to, not simple minded name calling as you engage in. Thanks for playing. Epic fail.

The Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy with an open economy. It is not socialist. It's official name is "The Kingdom of the Netherlands." Somehow I don't think a bunch of socialists would go for that.

"Socialist" to some atrophied hearts and sclerotic brains in The U$A, darkly equates to : Free at the point of use Universal Healthcare ; Good social provision of Education ; Welfare for the sick, disabled and unemployed ; An Old Age Free of Want ; A Minimum Wage - but this is considered so outrageous, frightening and undesirable to The Randian Psychopaths and (Pseudo)Free-Market Fanatics with their "atrophied hearts and sclerotic brains" as to generate forum-posts just like this one !

You are completely correct in your clear and concise comment and the problem in The Netherlands is there aren't enough Socialists telling THE BA$TARD BAN£$TER$ to F**k Right Off !!

I'm a human-person living in a "society" ; I accept, admire and embrace the precepts of 'socialism and democracy' and I have suspicion and disdain for avowed 'antisocial-ists' ------ QED !!!

Better yet, tell them to fuck off and BALANCE YOUR BOOKS. And if you can do that without causing an exodus of those that are capable of paying the bills and simply making it all much worse, God bless you.

The Dutch - who have a strong modern economy ; highly literate population ; excellent social services and welfare provision - should give serious and deep consideration to Nationalising their Central Bank ; Regaining Democratic Control Of The Issuance Of Their Currency ; Release their country and its population from Generational Debt-Bondage and run their society for the benefit of all not just their Bankers, Oligarchs and 0.01% Quislings - just like The Greeks should have done !!

The 'collective imaginary' of heavily propagandised Western (& Eastern) Populations in The USA and beyond needs to be awoken from its anaesthetised slumber ... and slowly but surely it is happening !

Controlling your own currency doesn't solve the borrowing problem. It just provides a printing press. So, go ahead, print currency hand it out and expect people to be dumb enough not to understand its falling value. Nothing is free, no matter how liberalism does try. Your printing press only creates inflation. Consequences are inescapable, sorry.

Your reply is redolent of deep pre-programming and very revealing. You seem utterly wedded to the present socio-economic status quo and almost functionally incapable of widening your view.

I did NOT suggest "printing money" ; I said :

"The Dutch - who have a strong modern economy ; highly literate population ; excellent social services and welfare provision - should give serious and deep consideration to Nationalising their Central Bank ; Regaining Democratic Control Of The Issuance Of Their Currency ; Release their country and its population from Generational Debt-Bondage and run their society for the benefit of all Not Just their Bankers, Oligarchs & 0.01% Quislings, just as The Greeks should have done !!"

You do at least accept the fact that there is a "borrowing problem" and that is a start. You need to go back to basics on the matter of 'The Theory of Money" and ask :

Where does all this "money" stuff come from ?

Who issues & decides how much of it there is ?

Why & 'From Who' Sovereign Nation States should have to "borrow" at all ?

What part does 'Geometrically Expanding Compound Interest Bearing Debt' have to play in the subjugation of entire populations with Generational Debt Bondage ?

I really think that you will gain from later cogitation after the quite reflection of :

IF after refection of the above you still believe that there is nothing that needs fundamentally changing in 'Modern High-Finance Kaputalism' then not only are you unable and unwilling to imagine new and better ways to order our affairs BUT you do not want others to contemplate a brighter future either !!! That would make you a "Dog in the Manger" !! Thus temet nosce !

The welfare states are just pissed that borrowing has a limit. They'd love to more directly control the decisions about how much money there is, that's how they'll be paying the bills when they can no longer borrow. So, they're in a box, borrow more (awaiting the day of crisis when they're cut off), control their own money-which is just short-hand for wanting to print it and create inflation, or take it and risk driving away the people in the cross-hairs. Or there's reform.

The housing bubble and a leveraging of households went on happily for a long time too. But leverage has limits and crisis emerges when the realization of default quickly becomes apparent. Great, you're mad because someone other than the spender "controls" money. Fine, now you control it. Print away and use it to pay your bills after the lenders cut you off. That's inflation. So, the consequences are inescapable.

There's just no way out of consequences now that debt is so high. Parties eventually have to end. They can all default and blow up the banking system. Ahh, bad banksters. But those banks lend so dry that up and not all debt is held by evil "banksters". Check your pension fund or mutual funds. Check how many retirees own government bonds. Opps, didn't think of that. LOL.

They can control their own currencies. But that blows away the benefits of the common currency zone for trade and efficiency. It also just allows reckless borrowers to try reckless printing as another stop on the way to eventual reckoning.

They can try to take it. But those being heisted might not stick around to get heisted. If you were sitting on a lifetime of savings, wouldn't you move it out of the country if you saw that coming? I would. Many others would too. So, even take it has problems.

Your idea of "reform" seems to be : Supine Acceptance and More Austerities for the 99% & other Bankster Mantras & you do not seem to wish to consider any wrong or need to reform from The Banksters. Thus again :

Commission slicing from the dubious High Frequency Trading of 'Innovative Financial Products' like Credit Default Swaps; Collateralised Debt Obligations ; Mortgage Backed Securities and other such Derivatives - euphemisms speciously derived in order to enable the speculative buying and selling of "Compound Interest Bearing Debt" is The Immoral and Unethical 'Ponzi Scheme' root of the 2008 crash and the whole world is still living with the consequences of the astronomical amounts of mythical-matrix-money, magically conjured up in 2008 & The 99% paid for it overnight then ($1.4 TRILLION by The UK alone) and Again Via Mass Austerities as governments desperately try to 'balance' their books.

Your desperate, propagandised and puppy-dog loyal defence of The Banksters is all cute 'n' all - but is absolutely wasted here.

Banksters just outs you as a propagandist. The borrowed money is ending. It is. The flailing has begun, but the borrowing will indeed be curtailed. The only question now is the route it will take. Simply take it and watch those in the cross-hairs flee. Print it and watch inflation create an offsetting reduction in purchasing power. Default and collapse the banking system, collapse credit, and then immediately achieve fiscal balance because borrowing halts over-night. Reform the welfare state. Your "bankster" propaganda offers nothing in terms of opening another alternative.

Insight, LOL. It's going to get ugly. Freebie withdrawal symptoms are already underway. Borrowing money is hitting the wall. It's best to start planning. If you're in the dependent class, the free shit is going to get curtailed. If you're better off, hide what you have, government's appetite won't dim without a fight. Use the freedom that remains to move your wealth somewhere else or to put it in a form where it can't be taken.

Here's some "insight" - IF you truly believe your own propaganda then rationally 'The Only Thing To Do' is buy Silver and Gold if you can afford it. That's the best investment advice you'll ever get in the next 5-10 years & I give it with the request that you give my 10% Commission on any capital gains, over to Any Charity of your choice after 5 years !!!

No, they wouldn't be bankrupt, they'd have adjusted. But if you want to talk about bankrupt unionized states, look no further than Illinois. They're held in a reform paralysis by their government unions.

And, no, the topic is about the European welfare states tipping over, not Mississippi. Reform is coming to Europe one way of another. Borrowing money is reaching the end game.

Those unionized States paid for everything Mississippi has. Same with Alaska, Montana, Arkansas, and that's just a few.

It amazes me that they get by on welfare, and then bitch like little girls, when those productive States take an economic hit, and could use some reciprocal aid, because those States got lazy and shiftless, after sucking so hard on the union's teet for so long.....Especially odd, is that has been those States and their (R)epelican't cohorts who have led the charge against unions. How stupid is that?

They didn't adjust.......They lived on union taxes for many decades.

Those States pay worth a shit, so rely on those States that do pay a reasonable wage.

How lazy is that? If they're "way of life" is so good? Why are so unable to aid the Nation?

Lazy? Guess you'd have to ask a government union employee in Illinois about that one. They're now the anchor that's pulling Illinois underwater. I used to live there and am thankful now to let some other sucker pick up that tab. It's interesting to watch though. The unions have their heels dug in as that state draws closer to insolvency. I'm glad my checkbook is safely beyond the reach of the union kleptocrats. I get to watch the Titanic from a lifeboat.

Its economy is in trouble because of the capitalist bankers, not the social programs. Germany is more "socialist" than Holland, and they are doing just fine, thank you very much. (So is all of Scandinavia.)

Maybe a few facts might actually make you sound like less of an ignorant ass.

Actually, it's the evil oligarchy out to rule the world. They think we the people got it too good, and so they are yanking back their finance strings..They are out to eradicate all social government in this world so they can rule like the Czars of old unabated. It's the classical epic battle between evil and the people. .

Socialism was never actually put into prática.A Russia never lived in a socialist, but fascist and ditatorial.O China is now a capitalist country, some years hence will blow your system político.Cuba live in a socialist system, but it is choked by the United States with broqueio comercial.Lá is the best course of medicine in the world, and is gratuito.A education is free, health is gratuita.Socialismo is the democratic ideal.

Text of the ruling class ideology is imposed on the whole of society as something "natural" as something that "always was and always will be." It is a widespread idea that "working progress can be made" and that when not achieved a better standard of living, to blame the person for failure or laziness. With the restoration of capitalism in Eastern Europe, neoliberalism spread the exacerbated individualism as a means to improve their lives by denying the collective vision of class struggle and, furthermore, the socialist strategy.

This kind of ideology is supported on economic growth, which can give the illusion of social progress by providing small improvements to the lives of workers. Today, in Brazil, these positions are in the majority in the working masses. Obviously, at that time, the bosses' profits increase much, but this is not discussed.
PSTU (Unified Socialist Workers-Brazil

The Dutch unemployment rate is 4.9%, with public debt at around 70% of GNP (enviable by any contemporary standard, by contrast, our public debt is in excess of 100% of GNP). So, as usual, this OP merely reflects the ignorance of conservatives, who are clueless when it comes to real data, and informed by what reduces to economic mythology.

Because the ruling elite globalists want them to. Duh!! Socialism can be a wonderful thing when done by sane leaders with kind hearts that actually love other human beings. The thing is, most leaders are the polar opposite of this by the time they come into real power, and what ends up happening is that our ideals of what socialism is, is far different from what their ideas of socialism are. I wish there was some way to live half way between capitalism and socialism long term and we could get rid of these terms that people have come to hate and think of a new term that incorporates the best of both. Perhaps "Socapilism".

I have yet to see where one type of "ism" was successful for any real length of time. I feel that we will find success where we can harness and use the best parts of two or three different economic systems.

no that's a almost fascist society it is very strange they don't fall into the mold of any previous object. They are also are moving more towards a more democratic society since the people are become more educated and there government is loosing power

According to the world bank, over the past 30 years, China has brought about 100 million people out of poverty. This is not to say that there are no problems or abuses in China, but what other country has accomplished that?

It's all in how you word it, I guess. It's probably more accurate to say the American consumer (and his European cohorts, probably, to a lesser extent) has brought millions of Chinese out of poverty, but I wouldn't expect an entity like the World Bank to call things like they actually are.

It wasn't just globalization, the Chinese also did a lot of infrastructure development, most notably, their fast train system, which connects every major city in China, as well as developments in agriculture, energy, and education.

After western economies started to collapse, China put its infrastructure development into high gear in order to create more of an internal market for its products. We in the west should do the same.

Globalization was a mixed blessing for the Chinese. They mostly got low paid sweatshop type jobs out of it. Admittedly, it was better than life in the villages though.

China would have been better off if we would have followed FDR's plan, which was to use the US war machine, developed during WWII, to manufacture high tech infrastructural machinery and provide it to third world countries on credit.

In the big cities, life in China is not so bad. I lived there for a year, teaching English, and am thinking of going back pretty soon.

The "high tech infrastructural machinery" will have to be maintained locally or else it will fall apart eventually but that happened all too often. It is important to use APPROPRIATE technology instead of HIGH tech so the locals can service and maintain the machinery. On that count, the U.S. war machine will be rather useless because it has mainly targeted high-cost, low-volume equipments but the third world countries need low-cost, high-volume equipments. Maybe over time, both sides can change concomitantly by starting small and then grow together.

Some people think that the "appropriate technology" concept is a form of propaganda intended to keep developing countries from developing fully. If the US were to sell high tech to the Chinese, there is no reason why we couldn't train them to maintain the equipment.

I see you say that they could start small and grow with time. Maybe you have a point there.

Yes, there has been a lot of animosity and distrust built up over the many decades regarding the "appropriate" level of technology. We need some true thinkers to determine what that is but I say that by and large the less-developed countries were mistaken for not using DDT to combat malaria and the U.S. was mistaken in not funding organizations that were linked to contraception and abortion. Every country has its own unique needs -- more people getting sick often is NOT what any country should aim for.

Training to maintain the equipment can be done relatively easily but the problem of providing the spare parts for the longer term can be a real problem unless the transition to higher technology is rapid enough. I envisage a virtuous cycle in which a little bit of technology increases productivity and that in turn produces the capital for upgrading the technology and so on. What is it that we want them to produce? How about a million satellite dishes a year to receive Hong Kong television satellite broadcasts?

I think you're right about the DDT, and regarding abortion, I can understand how countries like China need it, just to ensure that they can feed the people they already have. But some people take it to an extreme there, aborting daughters, when they would prefer to have sons.

Your virtuous cycle sounds like a good idea also. I think what we want them to produce, and what they want for themselves, is just the myriad of things that are needed to move villages into the modern world.

They need stuff like bulldozers to build roads to their isolated villages. I think in particular, they need advanced machine tools to improve the quality of their manufacturing.

Building roads to their isolated villages can cut both ways. By exposing them prematurely to competition in a modern market economy can cause shocks to their local economy and kill off indigent businesses and depopulate the villages due to the younger, more flexible, and ambitious people to chuck it all and leave. It is better that the villages are built up at moderate rates concentrating on improving their competitive skills (learning English, acquiring literary, mathematical, scientific, and modern management skills) first before starting the competition. We do not want them to "bring a knife to a gunfight" (imagine having Walmart barging in there selling stuffs really cheap) nor should we just let them languish. Something like the process of accretion of countries to euro-area can work well -- that is, no joining until the economies have become somewhat comparable. The euro-area's problem with some economically weaker states may not exist in China because China has the central government backup that the loosely coupled European states do not have.

Those roads are intended to help Tibet, not hurt it. Tibet has one of the fastest growing economies on earth these days. But partially that is due to how backwards Tibet was while under the rule of the Dalai Lama.

It is most unfortunate that there are still so many parts of the world that discriminate against females. Modern societies tend to equalize the sexes more.

Let us start with the historical sequence such as what the ancient Romans did with water -- aquifers, aqueducts, water pipes, water treatment plants, indoor plumbing, baths, toilets, sinks, showers, bathtubs, sewage treatment plants, etc. Perhaps a solar-heated water tank with showers first.

As adults, there is quite a bit of equality between men and women in China, at least in the cities. Maybe even more than here.

In the western areas of China, such as Tibet, there is quite a growing use of solar power. There is both a lot of small scale home based equipment, such as solar cookers, water heaters, photo voltaic based lighting and electrical systems for houses.

You failed to mention that the Chinese pay, what, $2 per day for their infrastructure labor. We pay prevailing wage rates on all government-sponsored infrastructure improvements. An ordinary laborer makes in excess of $48 per hour working on a highway project in Ohio. I can hire decent labor all day at $11 per hour.

Public Infrastructure in our country has become so expensive to build (thanks to the unions) that it simply can't be afforded without borrowing vast sums of money from China. Do you realize that we have as much public debt per person as Greece?

The notion that an infrastructure "stimulus" will stimulate the economy is true, for the most part. But at what price? 97% of the money would go to union shops, not the average worker. And why the hell pay people 3 times the wage rate in the private sector?

I think the most effective stimulus is a direct payment to taxpayers. Of course, this does nothing in the long run other than to devalue the dollar and raise inflation.

I don't think payments to tax payers would do it. To really move ahead, a country needs advanced infrastructure, and consumer spending isn't going to produce that.

When FDR developed the Consumer Conservation Corp., it took young people, literally off the streets, put them in camps out in nature somewhere, paid for their room and board, plus a dollar a day, most of which was sent to their families. They also learned skills and discipline that were later in high demand with employers.

Maybe we need something more like that, but in today's dollars, to put people to work while rebuilding infrastructure. Maybe something more like a range between $10 and $20 per hour.

Yes, I can't say I've gotten rich teaching in third world countries, but the experience is so meaningful that I've started feeling I don't want to do anything else. I am a hippie uncle. Actually, I'm not a hippie, but an uncle, yes.

Considering the extreme nature of our situation, hopefully we could get the unions to be flexible on a crash program like the CCC.

By the way, projects like NAWAPA would require many more than just a million young people:

Unions are not in the business of being flexible. They are in the business of extorting the highest wage possible. Go to a union rally sometime; not exactly a bunch of free-thinkers.

You haven't gotten rich because you don't work in the public school system. I have teacher friends in their 40s making $90,000 per year. You can buy a decent house here in Ohio for 90k! Some of them will collect more in retirement benefits than they were paid in salary.

I'd love to figure out a way to take all the at-risk urban youth and teach them trades. The Germans seem to have a great system.

Of course teaching is vitally important, but you can't expect taxpayers to overpay. Our public schools are awful. Cleveland Public graduates 52% of students. The taxpayers are over-paying now, that is why you see so many school levies defeated these days.

You are missing a few points. China is not Communist. There has never been a communist country in the world, only totalitarian ones falsely calling themselves communist. China today is an authoritarian state capitalist county.

Second, the World Bank says lots of thing for political purposes. Better trade relations between China and the West is chief among them. So although China did indeed bring almost a 100 million people out of poverty, the world bank does not mention the fact that it also killed or caused to die about 80 million people. China committed the largest genocide in all of human history.

I'm well aware of all the people who died in China. But consider what China had been through. First there were the opium wars with the west and then there was fascism from Japan. I think experiences such as the would be bound to drive a country a little crazy.

Killing 80 million people qualifies as a bit more than a "little" crazy. Other countries have gone through hell, too, and they didn't kill millions of their own people. There really is no excuse or rationalization. Mass murder on that - or any - scale cannot be justified, only condemned.

Yes, we should, and most people do indeed condemn those opium wars. But "equally" is a whole other issue, at least in terms of sheer numbers. What's more, they ended nearly one hundred years prior to Mao's genocide of his own people.

Regardless, the issue is that looking one-sidedly at any nation is in the interest of truth, but propaganda. China has accomplished a great deal. It has also committed among the worst atrocities in all of human history. People are coming out of poverty, but the human rights record continues to be abysmal. Employment is getting better, but workers are still treated worse than expendable cattle.

They are hardly a nation to be held up as an unblemished example to the world.

And there is NO justification, despite Chinese state sponsored propaganda, for what is being done to Tibet. There is no excuse for its ongoing cultural genocide, no matter how you want to spin it.

I think a lot of the anti China propaganda that comes out of our main stream media is meant to prepare us for a future war with China, a thermo-nuclear war, which our western oligarchs want to wipe out billions of people worldwide, China, Russia, the US, all included. All previous wars and genocide would pale against this.

Many see that a war against Iran is intended to trigger a war against Russia and China, unless these countries submit to the continued wars of the US against Asian and African nations. Also required would be that Russia and China submit their populations to the economic crisis and no growth policies which are in place here in the western world.

Since China and Russia would refuse on both accounts, haters of these nations may well get their war, just remember, this war is intended to kill off most of the US as well.

Nice job trying to change the subject to war with Russia and Iran. BUt the truth is you have your head up your ass about China. Every single human rights organization in the world, not the main stream media, has talked at length about China's cultural Genocide in Tibet. It's all hunky dory that you taught your little classes in a big city and met some oh so neat Chinese students there, but the government is a monster in terms of Tibet (and other human rights issues.) It is astonishing to me that you come here to this site professing to care about people's rights and supporting OWS, yet haven't the least compunction in supporting the deliberate destruction of an entire culture that happening right now, today, not in some 1850s opium war. And all because you made some friends. It's really disgusting.

Are you really so concerned about the destruction of cultures? Then why don't you worry about the 9 million American Indians that were wiped out by the Americans. But perhaps that was a long time ago? No excuses!

If you want to make comparisons with China, realize that China is as big as Europe, North America, South America and Russia combined. Count up all the wars, genocide and atrocities that happened among these people, and it will be about the same as what happened in China.

If you want to know what a monster is, find out what the rule of the Dalai lama was like in Tibet before it was liberated by the Chinese. This is from Michael Parenti, an American professor, not the Chinese government:

Most American Tibetologists understand these truths about Tibet today, it was a feudal theocracy which still existed in the 1950s. Most Tibetans were slaves or serfs of their masters, the Tibetan nobles and high lamas. The Dalai Lama owned thousands of slaves himself, and his primary purpose today is to represent the class of Tibetan ex-slave owners.

China had to put a stop to this. What do you think the US would have done if Mexico existed as a feudal theocracy, a slave state, in the 1950s? Don't you care about the rights of the Tibetan slaves? How "disgusting".

That's right, I went to China to make friends, and I'll probably go back soon to make more friends there. If you want to make enemies of them, go ahead, and you just may get your nuclear WW3.

I am a war monger? You get that from my being opposed to genocide? And black is white and up is down.

No amount of foul language can come close to the moral corruption it opposes when used against a SUPPORTER OF ONGOING GENOCIDE. Sometimes, cursing is the most appropriate response to moral obscenity like yours.

There is UNANIMOUS agreement among NGOs and human rights observers that genocide is occurring in Tibet. Your claim that ever single one of those independent groups is an organ of Hollywood, is preposterous on its face. It is a transparent and desperate attempt the rationalize the unthinkable. It is the political equivalent to being a climate change denier. You are stupid enough to confuse your nice friends with their government. You are not only an idiot, but one that supports mass murder and the destruction of an entire culture 'cause your buddies (who have nothing to do with it) are such wonderful folks. Guess what, you morally hollow moron, I have Chinese friends, too, and they are really nice. I don't confuse them with their government, I don't use them as an excuse to justify their government's massive human rights abuses. (In fact, it is not even "their" government, since they have no say in its decisions, China having that pesky quality of being an authoritarian state)

Yes, I new you would have endless justifications for your inability to get your mind out of the gutter.

Life was never better in Tibet for Tibetan people than it is now. There is no genocide going on there. And yes I do suspect the NGOs not as organs of Hollywood, but of the CIA and the international financial oligarchy.

I've had American friends that have been to Tibet and have told me there is no genocide going on there, some of them even post videos on Youtube telling that the propaganda is all a lie.

If your type gets us all killed in a war, I wouldn't be surprised. People of such ignorance just aren't fit to survive.

Reply (last one, because you are not worth my effort) to you insanity below:

I fully understand how you can say I am not fit to survive, You make the same judgement of Tibetans and their entire culture. You are quite comfortable deciding who is fit to live or die. You justify genocide because the Tibetans now have better roads? Can't you say the Native Americans? Are they better off having had their culture and population decimated for the same reasons?

Everything is all about your friends? They understand what is going on in Tibet based on being tourists there? Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and ALL the rest of the world's rights researchers and activists are agents of the CIA? Tell, me, how to you keep you tin foil hat clean?

You really are the worst king of rationalizing idiot I have ever come across. You are a filthy hollow piece of shit. Go fuck yourself, you enabler of mass murder.

I can't do anything in opposition to genocide that occurred in this country 150 years and more ago. If it was happening now, YOU BET I would oppose it. Unlike you, I would not support it. You are supporting ONGOING GENOCIDE.

I don't care about your fucking assessment of the Dalai Lama's rule nor that of one single isolated professor's that you strut out like clockwork to rationalize genocide, you piece of shit.

Genocide is going to happen now if people like you keep perpetrating hatred, so there is something you can do to stop it.

Like I said, its not just Parenti who knows the truth about Tibet, most professors of Tibetan studies world wide know what the truth is. You just want to buy into the propaganda that's spooned out in Hollywood movies and books about Tibet to get us to hate China.

Like most of the Dalai Lama's supporters, you claim to be non violent, but just look at the foul language you can't prevent yourself from using "fucking assessment", "piece of shit". You're providing quite an accurate picture of the mentality of a war monger. I'm sure you have a very good justification for it though.

You are right. In fact, most of humanity WAS poor by today's standards. Communism in its purer form of "collective" ownership of the means of production NEVER worked in any large scale for any length of time. China ABANDONED that to achieve its economic miracle. Well, to stay in power, the Chinese Communist Party had to whitewash it as Communism with a Chinese Flavor. It has long changed into a near-fascist state as DanielBarton has stated above.

Communism had been a problem for the world because of its stirring up class warfare and confiscation of private properties. We got Ayn Rand because of Soviet Communism.

Yes, there are definitely labor related problems there. But I believe the government is trying to improve the condition of the average person in China. Most Chinese people are happy with their government. They do grumble about issues that effect them, and there certainly are abuses, but I think its getting better.

Also, I wouldn't say that China has the military ambitions that a country like Nazi Germany had. I think the overall cultural philosophy in China is still Confucianism which is known to be against militaristic.

Than consider the military activity of the US over the past decade. It seems like we been in one conflict after another in Middle Eastern and African countries. Isn't this a kind of a "blitzkrieg" that could indeed lead us into WW3, through a confrontation with Russia and China over Syria or Iran?

Militarism does indeed have much to do with the economy. Here in the west, our military industrial complex accumulates wealth at the top of society.

Regarding unions, I agree. They should have them there, here and everywhere. But our labor movement is certainly on the decline, isn't it? The Chinese government has said that they want to move to more of a high wage, high skill model of employment.

Also consider the role of global corporations in suppressing the labor movement in China.

We dont ban labor unions, geez. Public employee labor unions should be banned, but there is a rich history of solid private labor unions. Private labor unions are on the decline due to very poor union leadership.

My definition of fascism of a state is when it is totalitarian and acts in the interests of big businesses. China had rather strong absolute political power over its people and its lower governments catered to business interests by using "eminent domain" power to seize land for businesses.

Yes, as long as you stay APOLITICAL and censor yourself, China is pretty "free." However, as a U.S. Citizen who believes in fair play and due process, I find China very much wanting. A caged bird in a very large cage is still a caged bird (and not to mention that certain bird songs are VERBOTEN)!

I think China took the deal that the west offered it, because it didn't have much better choice. That is, big businesses providing low wage sweatshop kinds of jobs.

I don't think I was "apolitical" while I was there. I discussed politics a lot with my students in class. One day, a student stood up and gave a long speech about how he thought Mao was a devil. This was with CCP members in class.

I think both China and the US would have been better off if we would have offered China FDR's deal, which was to offer them advanced, high tech equipment on credit. Once such equipment would have been installed in their economy, it would have paid off for both China and the US.

It was obvious that CCP members had tacitly consented to the student's views. Most thinking people who know the truth of what Mao did would not have fought much for him posthumously. Many CCP members themselves had suffered at the hands of Mao, not to mention numerous peasants.
The corpse of Mao is still in Tiananmen Square but it is just there to be a symbol to the hero-worship for the populace so the CCP can retain its Communist legitimacy. Have you tried discussing Falun Gong with your students in China? I am sure that you would have had CCP's attention then.

We do not need to offer China FDR's deal. China is doing extremely well with its state-mandated transfer of technology as a condition for partnering so Chinese companies will have majority ownership, not to mention China's stealing technology in myriad ways. It is much cheaper to steal than to buy!

As a matter of fact, I did make it a point to discuss Falun Gong with them. I didn't have much opinion about it myself, and was just open to what they had to say.

There are divergent opinions about Falun Gong in the west as well:

"Evidence points to a deep and very high-level operation linked, among other things, with the long-term effort by circles centered on Britain’s Prince Philip, to propagate “environmentalist” ideology into China—including Prince Philip’s personal emphasis on Buddhism and Daoism as key to organizing of anti-industrial “religious-environmentalist” movements in Asia. Implicated also are channels of influence radiating into China from the powerful Anglo-American mass-media and sports cartel, including especially the British intelligence-linked Hollinger Corporation and operations run out of Australia, as well as via Hong Kong and other present and former British Commonwealth areas.

...Li Hongzhi violently denounces modern science and technology, which he claims are responsible for destroying the morality of society.

...Li Hongzhi’s writings are primitive charlatanry, appealing mainly to the most poorly educated strata in China, especially the older, unemployed, and underemployed, who (among other things) are worried about their health.

...Hongzhi’s claim of 100 million followers in China appears wildly exaggerated, the official Chinese government press is itself emphasizing that the kind of destabilizing potential represented by Falun Gong poses a serious problem, which must be overcome by “popularization of science,” better education, and raising living standards."

From: FalunGong: Who is trying to destabilize China?
by Jonathan Tennenbaum

China's government is fragile if it is scared by a mere religious sect. The U.S. has many of those in the schools, in the neighborhoods, and perhaps in our Congress, too, but we are NOT scared although we are sometimes exasperated by the fanaticism. China's firewall also shows that it is afraid of free speech leading to chaos. That speaks volumes. Oh, I should take "free speech" back because China probably would have wanted "subversive speech" instead, divulging "state secrets." The U.S. really needs to classify how many hamburgers and frankfurters we have eaten in the last year lest the Deutscher betrays us to China!

China was backwards, they didn't have the infrastructure or education of an advanced society like the US. I think this is why they were poor.

I think that it can be very difficult for countries with such an ancient culture to make changes and adapt to the modern world. Its like a law of physics - a body at rest tends to stay at rest. The more "inertia" that body has, the harder it will be to get it moving.

China is not all backwards. Some cities have much newer infrastructure than the U.S. I suspect that you were teaching in a rural area in China so we might have been talking about different groups of people regarding technology transfer.

The sheer volume of humanity that the Chinese government tries to lift out of poverty is gargantuan so I wish them the best of luck. Yes, the rural population needs more help from the Chinese government to develop. I do not really think that China's ancient culture is a material impediment to its rapid modernization because there have been similar cultures in Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, and Japan that have modernized rather quickly.

Yes, actually, I lived in Guangzhou, the major city of southern China. There was an impressive subway and light rail system there. But I was thinking of the country side as being backward. But even in the cities, there is some kind of backwardness to the people.

That's a good point about the culture, but I'm not talking about Confucianism or some official philosophy. I just mean that there are a lot of people who live in villages there who don't have much exposure to modern ideas, and that creates an inertia for the society.

If the huge mass of village people in China could be reached with a modern education, I suppose they could become a modern society in a generation.

The Chinese government may think that modern ideas are subversive and block their dissemination lest they become destabilizing. I believe that China can and should try to achieve modernization of the village people, too, in a single generation. As for modern ideas, the mythical dragon that is China has already had the Pearl of the Orient, Hong Kong, since 1997 so China can easily get the ideas from there. Hong Kong was another example of rapid modernization with a mostly Chinese culture (that I had forgotten to include in my list above).

I don't think the Chinese government wants to block modern ideas. They bring thousands of western teachers into China each year, who mostly operate under fairly mild supervision. When I was teaching there, the only thing that the school cared about was whether their students were happy with me and paying their money.

I think getting modern ideas is not the hard part, getting them out to those poor people in the villages is what is difficult. I know that most westerners, like myself, prefer going to the big cities to teach. The Chinese government even has to make an effort, offer special incentives and such, to get city educated Chinese people to go out to teach in the villages.

Once they're in the villages, they often have a lot of substandard materials to teach with, or even a lack of materials. Some teachers, both foreign and Chinese, pay for materials themselves. Even in the cities, some times the materials can be quite pathetic.

China has quite a huge teacher recruiting program, but even so, its hard for them to get enough teachers to go over there. If you are talking about people in the US developing the lessons, I don't know, maybe. Some of the bigger schools there have staff members who develop lessons. I have kind of an ambition to start a company to publish ESL lessons for foreign schools.

I'm part owner of a school in Argentina and have developed a course to take Spanish speakers from the level of no English up past the intermediate level.

To give an example, for a one hour lesson, I was supposed to "explain the significance of what it means to "hang out" with your friends." Many of the lessons that I was given were just like this, very minor points that I could explain in about five minutes that I was asked to make last for an hour.

This was in a company that had maybe six schools in the biggest cities of China, with a full complement of corporate staff, office assistants, sales people, teachers, marketing staff, etc. With all that, it never occurred to them to improve the lessons they had been using for the past thirty years.

As a result, we teachers developed a lot of our own lessons just using ideas from the internet. Finally I got the other teachers to start saving the lessons we had improvised, so as to share them with each other.

It seems that the teachers can use some online support perhaps from the good old U.S.A. The U.S. should be able to scrounge up some high school or college students during the summer to create more modern teaching materials for China. It can also alleviate our youth unemployment problem and help pay for college tuitions.

Not a opinion. This is fact. The average American consumes far more food then necessary. Also the human race still decides to pick sides created by imaginary lines on a planet that is clearly a sphere. How can you actually pick sides on a sphere? We are all human and we are all one family. Not some crazy opinion, this is scientific fact.

Human nature???? I don't believe in that stuff. I am a human nurture person. And all of the above you said I do not do. I do not pick sides in arguments either because it all has to do with expectations and those are things I do not like to have. I think a unassuming life is a good one. We should implement science into our life's and start doing what is necessary for all humans. I genuinely do not like being selfish because it is bad for human progress.

I don't do those things anyways. I leave my motorcycle outside on the sidewalk actually. People call me crazy for that. However, I love thy neighbor and I don't really care for material objects. What I seek in life is knowledge and other then that all I need is food water and shelter. I do not set boundaries for anyone. Everyone is on a level playing field from my mom to mass murderers. It is a social arrangement that brings people to be. So I forgive them for they know not what they do.

We are ahead of many countries today, but we are collapsing and they are growing. If this continues, the only thing that can happen is that they will pass us by. Either that, or we'll have a world war.

They are hardly "failing" nations. Yes, they are starting to realize that the Nanny State can't last forever and when they run out of other peoples money the party is over.
However, today I did read that 150 million people in this country receive some sort of government assistance. I'd say we are pretty much already a socialist state.